Cruel and unusual punishment

The statement that the government shall not inflict cruel and unusual punishment for crimes is found in the English Bill of Rights signed in 1689 by William of Orange and Queen Mary II who were then the joint rulers of England following the 'Glorious Revolution' of 1688. These exact words later appeared in the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution (1787). Very similar words ('No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment') appear in Article Five of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (A/RES/217, December 10, 1948). The right, under a different formulation ('No one shall be subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.') is found in Article Three of the European Convention on Human Rights (1950). The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) also contains this fundamental right at Article Twelve and it is to be found again in Article Four (quoting the European Convention verbatim) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2000).

Related Topics:
English Bill of Rights - 1689 - William of Orange - Queen Mary II - England - Glorious Revolution - 1688 - Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution - 1787 - Torture - Universal Declaration of Human Rights - United Nations General Assembly - December 10 - 1948 - European Convention on Human Rights - 1950 - Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - 1982 - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - 2000

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

What these words mean in practice is the subject of much legal argument. It is in keeping with the basic legal maxim that the "punishment should fit the crime". The "unusual" provision, at least, is clear: providing that persons will not be subjected to arbitrary, humiliating, or capricious punishment outside the normal course of the law (for example, tarring and feathering). In the United States of America, for example, there has never been the punishment of drawing and quartering, because of the Bill of Rights. However, by the twentieth century, many people came to consider capital punishment per se to be cruel and unusual punishment. As of 2005, twelve states have prohibited the death penalty, and others have specifically prohibited certain methods of execution, e.g. by electrocution, by hanging, etc. In two recent cases, the Supreme Court has ruled that the application of the death penalty, in certain circumstances - such as the execution of a minor under the age of 16, or of a mentally handicapped person - are unconstitutional. It should be noted however, that the death penalty was used in the United States since its inception, including when the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution. See Atkins v. Virginia and Roper v. Simmons. In the European Union, on the other hand, prohibition of the death penalty has been made a fundamental condition which must be passed into the law of states hoping to join.

Related Topics:
Tarring and feathering - United States of America - Drawing and quartering - Bill of Rights - Twentieth century - Death penalty - Execution - Electrocution - Hanging - Supreme Court - Minor - Mentally handicapped - Atkins v. Virginia - Roper v. Simmons - European Union

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The United States Supreme Court in hearing United States v. Booker has decided that mandatory minimum sentences are unconstitutional.

Related Topics:
United States Supreme Court - Mandatory minimum sentence

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~